get_selected_clips

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Gets') with no mention of mutation, which is useful. However, it does not describe return format, behavior when nothing is selected, or failure modes for invalid sequence IDs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to clarifying the operation and its object, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a low-complexity tool with one parameter, the description is close to sufficient, but because there is no output schema and no annotations, it should state more about return behavior—e.g., that it returns a list and what happens when no clips are selected. These are clear gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter sequenceId is documented as 'The ID of the sequence.' The description only references 'the specified sequence' without adding semantic detail, so it does not meaningfully enhance what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Gets') with a precise resource ('all currently selected clips') and scope ('in the specified sequence'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from selection-mutating siblings like select_all_clips and from positional getters like get_clip_at_position.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_clip_at_position, get_clip_at_playhead, or get_full_sequence_info. There are no stated exclusions, prerequisites, or context cues to help an agent choose among getter tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.